case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2015-10-03 03:23 pm

[ SECRET POST #3195 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3195 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 054 secrets from Secret Submission Post #457.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2015-10-03 08:13 pm (UTC)(link)
Does anyone else dislike the new image size limit?

(Anonymous) 2015-10-03 08:13 pm (UTC)(link)
Just speaking personally I am fine with it
fingalsanteater: (Default)

[personal profile] fingalsanteater 2015-10-03 08:14 pm (UTC)(link)
i didn't even know it changed until case said so. 150 extra pixels either way is unnoticeable to me, apparently.
comradesmiler: (Default)

[personal profile] comradesmiler 2015-10-03 08:20 pm (UTC)(link)
Not really, just gives us more space to play with.
feotakahari: (Default)

[personal profile] feotakahari 2015-10-03 08:45 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm still shrinking all my images to 600 x 600. It feels tidier.
elaminator: (Hannibal: Hannibal (the sad cannibal))

[personal profile] elaminator 2015-10-03 08:56 pm (UTC)(link)
I didn't notice it either until case mentioned it. I try to view f!s from my computer when possible so the size isn't an issue, but even viewing from my phone...it doesn't make much difference. I'll probably keep my secrets to 600x600 anyway because I'm used to it, but I don't mind people using the extra space.
Edited 2015-10-03 20:58 (UTC)

(Anonymous) 2015-10-03 09:32 pm (UTC)(link)
Nope, I like it. I kind of wish case would add a minimum size limit for the people who keep making secrets for ants.

(Anonymous) 2015-10-03 10:24 pm (UTC)(link)
Not a fan. Not only does it not play nicely with my phone, it also encourages needlessly long-winded secrets.

(Anonymous) 2015-10-04 12:05 am (UTC)(link)
I really doubt people are going out of their way to make verbose secrets because they got a few extra pixels around the edge.
fingalsanteater: (Default)

[personal profile] fingalsanteater 2015-10-04 01:19 am (UTC)(link)
lol yeah. i use it to make my font bigger

(Anonymous) 2015-10-04 02:59 am (UTC)(link)
Not really. The secrets aren't any longer than they were before. I certainly haven't seen any extra-large secrets that wouldn't have been possible to do in a 600x600 size limit. It just gives people more room to write in.

(Anonymous) 2015-10-03 11:59 pm (UTC)(link)
I like it.

(Anonymous) 2015-10-04 12:07 am (UTC)(link)
750 is a more pleasing number for OCD reasons. I like it. 600 always seemed arbitrary to me.

(Anonymous) 2015-10-04 01:23 am (UTC)(link)
I hate it. I have trouble processing things when they're presented in a larger format, no matter what they are, so this really doesn't help my secret-reading experience.
kitelovesyou: butterfly scales (Default)

[personal profile] kitelovesyou 2015-10-04 01:28 am (UTC)(link)
Can you scale the page at all?

(Anonymous) 2015-10-04 04:17 am (UTC)(link)
No. I read this site on a ereader, so things always look kind of small regardless. I didn't even notice the new limit until someone mentioned it.
caerbannog: (Default)

[personal profile] caerbannog 2015-10-04 05:22 am (UTC)(link)
Haven't really noticed a difference on mobile. Notice the slightly larger ones on PC but not hugely noticeable.

(Anonymous) 2015-10-04 09:25 am (UTC)(link)
I like it!